A steady 8x10 camera for long and heavy lenses?

[Jerome Wu]

Dear All:

I feel much appreciated for your generous suggestions and advices. To be frank, my large format experience is very limited to a used sinar f1 4x5 monorail, which happened to be available from our local dealer. My longest lens on 4x5 is 240mm which brings no problem at all for a metal monorail 4x5, steadiness or bellow length.

I know 8x10 is a different story. And, my motivation for finding a wood foldable is that my f1 monorail is difficult to fit into a backpack without decomposing a bit. So, I actually carry it in a pelican case without decomposing it to prevent me from breaking parts while assembling them in the field. (Sometimes, I do envy the portability of my friend's 4x5 wood foldable in the field...)

I usually shoot not too far by my car, within 15-20mins of walk. Regarding the long lens, I am not sure if the APO-Tele-Xenar 600mm will actually benefit from the shorter bellows extension, better optical quality and brighter ground glass, compared with Fujinon-C 600mm. I also notice that the triple lens weight and double price will be essential issues to be considered.

According to your inputs, I guess a 8x10 wood foldable will need extra stablizing support with long lenses while a monorail 8x10 may not. So, the total weight might be almost no difference (wood + extra support vs. metal monorail). But 8x10 wood foldable benefits from backpack compatibility (is that true?)

I am trying to digest all the great info that you offered, thanks a lot!

Jeremy

[Ted Harris]

Jeremy,

If youy live in or near a large metro area where you can rent some 8x10 gear I strongly suggest you do so before making a major in vestment. It is a quantum leap from 4x5 to 8x10 not jsut in terms of the size, price and weight of the equipment but alos in terms of the price of the film, the setup time, depth of field issues, etc. For years I shot 4x5, 5x7 and 8x10 spending most of my time with 4x5 and 8x10. Recently I have reeveluated 8x10 realizing that I was shooting less and less of it over the past 3 years and have refocused my efforts on 5x7 where the equipment is only marginally larger than 4x5. One of the major issues you need to think about (IMO) is the way you workwith th elonger lenses. With your bellows cranked out over 600 mm the distance from behind the darkcloth is just toooooooo long todo any adjustment to the front standard unless you have very very long arms.

Just a few more things to think about. The results from 8x10 and larger can be breathtaking but you do want to be sure you know what you are getting into.

Ted

[Eric Leppanen]

Jeremy,

The advantage of using a foldable field camera with supplemental long lens supports (versus a heavy studio-type monorail) is that it is scaleable. The monorail will be heavy all the time, even when using short to medium lenses, whereas the field camera will be much lighter except when you need to carry the additional supports. And yes, an 8x10 folding field camera can fit in a camera backpack (the Lowepro Super Trekker and f64 extra large seem to be the most popular). When using short to medium lenses, I can comfortably take my 8x10 on short hikes (up to several miles) with several film holders in my backpack and carrying the tripod by hand. With the monorail, you'd have to stay close to the car.

As Ted says, 8x10 is a huge step up bulk-wise from 4x5, and I strongly agree that if all possible rent or borrow a sample 8x10 system first before taking the plunge. 8x10 is definitely only for a very dedicated camera buff or professional. The film holders are large, the backpack and/or carrying case you'll use is large, the tripod and tripod head have to be substantial, and ice chest or other storage container for storing your exposed and unexposed film will be large. On photo trips, you may fill the entire trunk of your car with camera gear! The stability problems are greater, and lens coverages (unless you pay big bucks) are smaller than 4x5. Unloading, cleaning, and reloading a bunch of 8x10 film holders after every shoot can be a drag. But the negs are breathtaking, and there is still no solution around (digital or otherwise) that provides a comparable capability (cost effectively) to 8x10 film.

[Ken Lee]

Why not replace the lenses: Their weight is at the root of your problem, no ? If you don't want to replace them, just add some light-weight equivalents to your collection, or build a second tripod onto the camera to give extra support.

[Tony Karnezis]

The Kodak Master 8x10 fulfills your criteria 1 and 2. From what I know, Paula Chamlee uses lenses longer than 24" on hers with a bellows that's longer than the standard one. The standard bellows easily takes a 24" lens, but the lens boards aren't Sinar or Linhof type. I had Grimes make me an adapter to take Linhof boards. Just a thought.

[Tony Karnezis]

Ted brings up a good point. Unless you have really long arms or rear focus/movements, you will have to come out from under the darkcloth to make many adjustments. The Kodak Master has geared rear focus and extensive rear movements (except rise). Which of the cameras mentioned above has rear focus or rear movements?

[Ole Tjugen]

I think the Gandolfi Traditional will fulfill all your requirements - at least my 5x7" one does. If I were to buy another camera today, it would be a Gandolfi Variant...